Nearly 23 lakh EVMs and 25 lakh VVPAT units would be required for simultaneous elections. Total cost for EVMs and for VVPATs, will be nearly Rs 10,000 crore.

Another issue the ministry raised was on the benefits of continuing with elections at regular intervals to “preserve the sanctity of our democracy.”

NEW DELHI: The union law ministry has sought answers from the Law Commission to three main issues regarding the holding of simultaneous elections across India about the rationale of reducing cost, whether the move might “undermine the depth and the democratic fabric of Indian polity” and whether the model code of conduct affected developmental work.

The ministry has prepared a comprehensive note raising these important questions underlining the possible demerits of simultaneous elections and sought answers from the Law Commission, a body that recommends legal measures to the government. EThas exclusively accessed the note prepared by law ministry.

QUESTIONING THE SAVINGS ARGUMENTOf all the arguments marshalled in favour of synchronisation of elections, multiple times reduction in cost has been the strongest. “However, it is a moot point whether it would result in any savings in real savings,” reads the ministry’s note. As per Election Commission, nearly 23 lakh EVMs and 25 lakh VVPAT units would be required for simultaneous elections.

Total cost for EVMs would work out to Rs 4,600 crore and for VVPATs, it would be another Rs 4750 crore. Thus, the total cost will be around Rs 10,000 crore. “The shelf life of machines is only 15 years and has to be replaced for security reasons. The recurring expenditure of Rs 10,000 crore will be incurred every 15 years for EVMs/VVPATs alone”, the ministry’s note said.

“In case of simultaneous elections, such enormous cost would be utilised only three times in its lifespan, whereas in the current scenario, machines are used several times for elections since machines are transferred from one state to another state as per requirement. Further requirement of warehouses for EVMs will also double, resulting in enhanced rental construction costs,” the note added.

The law ministry also said additional polling personnel like Central Armed Police Force (CAPF) would be required since the number of polling booths would increase as also the number of candidates and campaign-related activities. Therefore, the cumulative and cascading effects of expenditure on various facets of holding simultaneous elections could be much higher than (currently) being estimated”, it said. The ministry’s note asked that “in view of the above, would synchronisation of elections result in savings in real terms?” and suggested “rather, it may end up in more expenditure to the exchequer.”

WARNS AGAINST ‘BANDWAGON’ EFFECTAnother issue the ministry raised was on the benefits of continuing with elections at regular intervals to “preserve the sanctity of our democracy.”

The note said “there is a perception that holding simultaneous elections may influence voter behaviour in a manner that voters would end up voting for a particular political party which is enjoying a near-sweeping wave in its favour owing to its influential presence in the majority of states.”

“Therefore, effectively, there is likelihood that this would lead to a ‘bandwagon’ or ‘contagion’ effect, whereby voters could be influenced to favour the party which is riding the crest of a ‘wave’.

Further, such a situation could engender an ‘underdog effect’ also, whereby voters may jettison less influential parties or their candidates due to the ‘bandwagon effect’,” it added. The result could be an eclipsing or marginalisation of the regional parties which represent the interests of local social and economic groups, it underlined.

“This may undermine the depth and the democratic fabric of Indian polity. Whereas elections at regular intervals, in spite of all its projected advantages, offer the people of the country opportunities for change at regional levels in case of non-performance or maladministration of a particular party elsewhere,” it contended.

It said that “besides the prospect of facing elections at regular intervals could keep the party and the government in check, which could act a tonic for maintaining the vibrancy of our democratic polity.” Hence, the ministry asked the commission “is it not better to continue with elections at regular intervals for the sake of preserving the sanctity of our democracy?”

On the issue of model code of conduct, the ministry has said that it is argued in favour of simultaneous elections that once MCC is imposed “all developmental activities come to a standstill in the state” and added that “consequently, frequent elections have a deleterious effect on the socialeconomic development of the states.”

However, the ministry has countered the view, saying the code is confined to a state headed for elections and that it comes into force about 35 days in advance and remains in force till the announcement of the results.

Moreover, the restriction is confined to only new schemes and not on the ongoing schemes. Thus, the ministry has asked: “Is there any substance in the claim that periodical elections adversely affect the developmental activities of the entire state for protracted periods due to the imposition of model code of conduct?”